CXT: "I don't recall that the USA gave Saddam poison gas or any WMD's......if you have a source for that please post it"

There was a recently released CIA communique to the effect that we at least knew he was going to be using chemical weapons against Iran, and that it would be tied to us, because we were supporting him at the time. No one in this game got to be where they are without being a gangster. No good guys anywhere.

In other news, the latest Pope seems to be actually preaching the message of Christ, as it was related in the Bible. Wow, that's a new one.

We supported Stalin against Hitler--and Hitler and Stalin were allies prior. The plan was to carve up Europe between them. Until of course Hitler decided he didn't want to share. Ironically Stalin helped Hitler re-arm in direct violation of the treaty that ended WW1. So the same weapons Stalin help manufacture were used against him.

We may or may not have known he was going to use them--but Jorvik claimed that the USA supplied them.

Oddly if he is correct then his other claim of there being "no WMD's" Iraq would be wrong....according to Jorvik he DID have them and we knew it because we gave them to him.

Well why should I proviude evidence when the US government won't provide evidence of Syrias use of sarin

but here is one bit that I foundhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j5u1skEoqLs from about 8:32 although it doesn't say WMD it says guns.......a point to make though the US used depleted uranium and White phosphorous in Iraq, and Agent orange and Napham in Vietnam, aren't these "chemical Weapons".........a bit hypocritical don't you think?

Because you made the claim--and the burden of proof is on the person making the claim.

In point of fact--multiple sources--and not just USA sources have determined that Sarin was used in Syria.

-Agent Orange--maybe, but certainly not by the standards of the time. Wasn't designed as a "people killer." Kinda like all the asbestos we used for decades--nobody really understood just how dangerous it was.

-Napalm--nope--does not even come close to the definition of a "chemical" weapon.

-Willie Peter--nasty stuff but not a "chemical weapon" in the general meaning of the term.

-Depleted Uranium--again, not actually a "chemical weapon" but does seem to have to some term health effects--but you need some pretty dense stuff to penetrate armor--tungsten works but it too has some reported long term effects. So if you need to get through armor your choices are kinda limited.

In other words its only "hypocritical" if you define the term "chemical weapon" all of context and actual meaning. By that definition the gunpowder used in the cartridge is also a "chemical weapon."

I generally don't trust "argument by youtube" but I will check them out.

Ok--checked them out--don't really understand what the unsupported self-serving statements and claims of Galloways have to do with anything.

Note that Galloway draws a distinction between his meetings and Rumsfelds.Galloways meetings with a murderous madman were about how to bring peace and end suffering--like Saddam had in interest in doing either--this is the same guy that hired official, card carrying rape squads after all. While anybody else meeting with a murderous madman must be up to no good.

How does he know precisely what was discussed in a meeting with Saddam and Rumsfeld?

Besides--didn't Galloway make out like a bandit in oil deals with Saddam? Or is that motivation only applied one direction?

Quote"Because you made the claim--and the burden of proof is on the person making the claim."

OK well doesn't that apply to Obama as well??.........he made the claim that Assad used Sarin but refuses to offer any evidence..nobody is disputing the use of sarin, the question is .Who used it? There are as many claims that the US used it as that is was Assad.Have a listen to Galloway's speech, he totally destroys their arguments, which is why he is walking around now.

A lot of the people I speak to in the US don't like the fact that the US airforce is being used as the Al Qaeda airforce. What's that all about then?......................you are the only ones with WMD and ties to al Qaeda

No there aren't. There might be some claims the US used it, but there are probably some claims that Genghis Kahn used it too. I'm a big critic of U.S. foreign policy, but we didn't release sarin in Syria, that's just silly. A silly Syrian sarin suggestion. So stop seizing strange sources suggesting subversive strategies stateside.

I listened to the speech--and what I heard was a bombastic, self serving, anti-Semitic blowhard whom on multiple occasions made statements in defense of Saddam and was friendly with at least one of his loathsome sons.

His demands that the Senate "charge him with perjury" are IMO less than persuasive as I am not sure that the US Senate had the authority to put a British citizen on trial much less jail him.

Despite his protestations the USA Senate maintains they have evidence of his multiple wrong-doing in the various oil for food scams. Galloway has his claims the US Senate has theirs....and I see no reason to trust Galloway.

I note that the ever litigious Galloway declined to file a libel suit/s in the USA where unlike Old Blighty the rules pertaining to such suits are considerable more hard core.The fact he won such lawsuits in GB is IMO less than persuasive as GB is specifically chosen for such "lawfare" due to its low thresholds for libel.

As I recall he was expelled from the Labor Party (his own party at the time) and suspended by Parliament at a later date, for his behavior.

He reportedly also has some interesting views on what constitutes rape--views which reportedly caused a highly placed female staffer at his own organization to resign her position.

"Ties to AQ"

Depends on what you mean by "ties".......if you define "ties" like you do "chemical weapons." then whom does not have such "ties?"

Quote"No there aren't. There might be some claims the US used it, but there are probably some claims that Genghis Kahn used it too. I'm a big critic of U.S. foreign policy, but we didn't release sarin in Syria, that's just silly. A silly Syrian sarin suggestion. So stop seizing strange sources suggesting subversive strategies stateside. "

Watch this and follow it up, then you will see why Blair followed Bush................ to become a multi millionaire...it's not about saving anybody, it's about money and power while ex soldiers are pleading for help Wall street banks are lapping up the money and screwing tax payers money to fund them when they fail.more people on food stamps, less jobs for the young.Obama care which is a tax which will make healthcare less affordable..all the stuff you see now is garbage for the masses....I was just picking at the edges but they all interconnect...

jorvik wrote:Quote"No there aren't. There might be some claims the US used it, but there are probably some claims that Genghis Kahn used it too. I'm a big critic of U.S. foreign policy, but we didn't release sarin in Syria, that's just silly. A silly Syrian sarin suggestion. So stop seizing strange sources suggesting subversive strategies stateside. "

Watch this and follow it up, then you will see why Blair followed Bush................ to become a multi millionaire...it's not about saving anybody, it's about money and power while ex soldiers are pleading for help Wall street banks are lapping up the money and screwing tax payers money to fund them when they fail.more people on food stamps, less jobs for the young.Obama care which is a tax which will make healthcare less affordable..all the stuff you see now is garbage for the masses....I was just picking at the edges but they all interconnect...

Ray

You're starting to sound like a conspiracy theorist badly in need of his medication. This is an incoherent rant. You source YouTube videos rather than mainstream news sources - legitimate sources which BTW are not necessarily beholden to our leaders - and you present statements as fact with nothing to back up your statements. You end up with a classic case of argumentum ad hominem.

At the very least, you have a lot of homework to do if you want to be taken seriously.

In order to make a point and provide comic relief, I leave you with the following commercial. It has become a metaphor for many ill-conceived sources. Note the number of hits.

Bill you see people talking about " conspiracy theory"...never about " conspiracy"...........have you heard of " LIBOR" where the banks colluded to suppress the interest rate? I hate the term "Conspiracy theory" ..the real term is " conspiracy"...they did that and there are more examples......the term " Conspiracy theory" is often used to dismiss people who have found a valid reason for the way governments and big business behave and make them look like cranks, when in fact the conspiracy is before your own eyes but through trust in government amd big business you choose to not believe it. You want to believe that America is all work and you will achieve something, when it is not.........your middlle class has been decimated, all your jobs have gone abroad, You have 17 trillion of debt..that is not a theory..you have $200 trillion in unsecured liabilities, pensions etc..........Dertroit has just declared bancruptcy .and you have the occasional peron speaking out about it like Dr Paul Craig Roberts

here he talks about the "Nonsence" about OBL murder. ......you should listen to people like him, I do......not the jingoistic nonsence you seem to favour.......... i don't really read martial arts forums now, I mostly listen to finance forums.i have money and I want to keep it....all of the West is heavily and unsustainably in debt.the ballon will burst....they always do

jorvik wrote:" Conspiracy theory" is often used to dismiss people who have found a valid reason for the way governments and big business behave and make them look like cranks

Maybe you *are* a crank, Ray. I am most definitely suggesting it.

jorvik wrote:your middlle class has been decimated, all your jobs have gone abroad

Wrong.

Step away from your internet crackpots and read a legitimate financial paper. The Wall Street Journal has been reporting repeatedly on the return of manufacturing jobs to the United States. Why? With fracking, the U.S. is now producing more natural gas than it can sell. It turns out that the savings from generating the energy needed to manufacture far outweighs the higher cost of U.S. labor.

Wall Street Journal wrote:More U.S. manufacturers are moving some of their production back from China, a new survey shows.

The survey by Boston Consulting Group, conducted in August and released Tuesday, found that 38% of U.S.-based manufacturing executives who responded were shifting production to the U.S. or considering that, up from 18% in a similar survey in February 2012. The latest survey drew responses from 216 U.S.-based executives at companies with annual sales of more than $1 billion.

About 13% of the companies already were moving production back or had done so, the latest survey found. About 8% planned to move production to the U.S. within two years, and 17% were considering such moves. Another 17% said they probably would consider moving production.

Scores of companies — including General Electric Co., Whirlpool Corp. and Caterpillar Inc. — have announced such “reshoring” moves in the past couple of years. Manufacturers increasingly try to shorten supply lines and reduce inventory by making products closer to where they are sold. Meanwhile, the surge in Chinese wages and higher shipping costs mean Asian production is no longer a no-brainer. The shale-gas boom is reducing U.S. energy costs, and some firms want to move production home to protect intellectual property.

Wall Street Journal wrote:His findings come as Boston Consulting Group—a leading proponent of the idea that U.S. manufacturing will come roaring back—predicts a surge in U.S. exports, partly helped by lower energy costs and stagnating wages. In a report for release Tuesday, BCG says rising exports and "reshoring" of production to the U.S. from China "could create 2.5 million to five million American factory and service jobs associated with increased manufacturing" by 2020. That, BCG says, could reduce the unemployment rate, currently 7.4%, by as much as two to three percentage points.

Maybe......but then as I have been demonstrating for several days now.......you are so focused on your narrative that you fail to consider any facts or POV other than said narrative.

You seem to idolize a guy like Galloway with no recognition of his own highly "questionable" deeds and statements.

I pointed out, in detail, several day ago that WMD's were only part of the reason for invasion.

And instead of even trying to rationally discuss it---your still just chanting the Lefty mantra of "Bush lied" days later.

As far as the economic problems you list---sure in 200 years things can go seriously off the rails at times. But where you make your fundamental error is assuming that anything is static.

Nations, like people, go through ups and downs--do I really need to point out all the various economic woes Great Britain has faced in the last 50 years?

And the thing is if your willing to work hard you can make it here--or at least live a much better life than where many people are from---and I need no other proofs than our immigration rates--legal and otherwise.Millions of people "voting with their feet" might well be an economic headache---but its a pretty good indication of people making choices about where and under what system they wish to live under.Why do you think so many Cubans risk death to reach the USA when Haiti is less than half the distance?

We are in this economic mess largely due to a wide range of horrible Leftist policies of the same sort that wreaked such havoc on much of Europe and Great Britain........people with a world view very similar to your own.